I suppose that by the title you may be thinking I
am going to brag on myself. Think again!

Let me introduce you to Michelle Goldberg. She is
no relation to Jonah Goldberg of National Review fame and one of our
syndicated columnists. Rather, Ms. Goldberg is one of the many
contributing writers to The Daily Beast.

She
looks innocent enough. But her looks disguise her, well I was going
to say naivety but naive she is not, neither is she misinformed. She
just doesn't reason well. Wait a minute, she's a liberal, and
didn't I
recently say that I have had it with liberals?

Well it turns out that Ms. Goldberg has written
an op-ed piece in which she claims that both Minnesota Congresswoman
Michele Bachmann and Texas Gov. Rick Perry have ties to a “fringe”
Evangelical movement seeking world domination. Yes, I’m being
serious here.

Goldberg contends that both GOP presidential
candidates are part of a movement called ‘Dominionism.” She writes:

Put simply, Dominionism means that Christians have a
God-given right to rule all earthly institutions. Originating
among some of America’s most radical theocrats, it’s long had an
influence on religious-right education and political organizing.
But because it seems so outré, getting ordinary people
to take it seriously can be difficult. Most writers, myself
included, who explore it have been called paranoid.

Sounding the alarm on what she sees as “the most
theocratic Republican field in American history,” Goldberg draws
some curious comparisons. For one, she attempts to tie radical Islam
to Dominionism, which, in turn, ties the beliefs underpinning both
Bachmann and Perry’s worldview to rabid levels of extremism:

Think of it like political Islamism, which shapes the
activism of a number of antagonistic fundamentalist movements,
from Sunni Wahabis in the Arab world to Shiite fundamentalists
in Iran.

Catch me Janice, I think my head is exploding!
Other than the fact that arguments such as this (if it can be called
an argument) is merely following that all important Rule 13 from
Saul Alinsky's Rules For Radicals:
"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

Goldberg goes on to explain that Dominionism
comes from a fringe sect called Christian Reconstructionism. This
small, extremist religious formation was founded by R.J. Rushdoony,
a Calvanist theologian, back in the 1960s.

According to Goldberg, Reconstructionism
advocates for replacing some elements of American government with
Old Testament law. This, of course, would include imposing the death
penalty for homosexuals, those who shave abortions and people who
abandon Christianity, among other extremities. Indeed, these beliefs
do sound more along the lines of radical Islam. In a 1998 issue of
Reason Magazine, Walter Olson
explains these issues in greater detail:

Those who would face execution include
not only gays but a very long list of others: blasphemers, heretics,
apostate Christians, people who cursed or struck their parents,
females guilty of “unchastity before marriage,“ ”incorrigible”
juvenile delinquents, adulterers, and (probably) telephone psychics.
And that’s to say nothing of murderers and those guilty of raping
married women or “betrothed virgins.” Adulterers, among others,
might meet their doom by being publicly stoned–a rather abrupt way
for the Clinton presidency to end.

This movement is clearly not within the
mainstream of Christian America. Nonetheless, following her
description of it, Goldberg begins to tie both Bachmann and Perry to
Reconstructionism. When discussing Bachmann’s alleged ties, Goldberg
writes:

She often praises the Christian nationalist historian David
Barton, who is intimately associated with the Christian
Reconstructionist movement; an article about slavery on the
website of his organization, Wallbuilders, defends the
institution’s biblical basis, with extensive citations of
Rushdoony.

But, this same webpage that Goldberg
references explains that “involuntary servitude is not
Biblical.” In fact, Barton goes to great lengths to speak against
pre-Civil War slavery. Rather than “defend” the institution, he
discusses its Biblical mentions and explores them in detail. Here,
Goldberg is misleading and, without a link, readers must research on
their own to find the truth.

Goldberg also charges Bachmann with espousing the
idea that Americans should only pay a 10 percent tax rate, a belief
Goldberg says is “common in Reconstructionist circles.” This
accusation comes from the congresswoman’s appearance in a Truth in
Action Ministries documentary called, “Socialism: A Clear and
Present Danger.”
Bachmann’s words in the clip were as follows:

“What Jesus said, ‘Render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s,
and render unto God that which is God’s,’ so there certainly is
a place for us to pay taxes to government. That’s legitimate. We
should do that as Jesus instructs. But we render to God that
which is God’s and the Bible calls for, approximately we are
thinking of tithe, maybe 10 percent that we are giving to God,
but beyond that we also give to charity. Jesus didn’t ask
government to be the charity; he asks the the individual and the
church to be charitable.”

Certainly, it is possible that Bachmann may be
advocating a 10 percent tax rate here, but there is some ambiguity
held within her words. This commentary is more about the government
not serving as charity than it is a call for a set tax rate. A more
concrete set of ideals will become evident as her campaign
progresses.

Of course, Goldberg is not the first to question Bachmann’s
views on slavery, among other issues. And, on issues like her
endorsement of the purportedly racist book “Call of Duty: The
Sterling Nobility of Robert E. Lee,” the presidential contendor may
have some explaining to do. Thus far, an explanation has not been
given as to why this book was posted under a “must-read” list she
endorsed. Still, some of Goldberg’s claims are a bit of a stretch.

She continues her writing by focusing upon
similar details as they pertain to Perry and his ties to the
Christian Reconstructionism movement. She writes:

Perry tends to be regarded as marginally more reasonable than
Bachmann, but he is as closely associated with Dominionism as
she is, though his links are to a different strain of the
ideology.

Here, she focuses upon the “Seven Mountains of
society” — family, religion, arts and entertainment, media,
government, education, and business. Goldberg insinuates that those
close to Perry are seeking to “infiltrate” the government (as well
as these other spheres of influence) and to then control every core
aspect of it. But, is that a fair assessment?

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with discussing
this movement and educating Americans about its existence. But,
tying candidates to its fray without conclusive data, while urging
Islamist comparisons seems a bit dangerous and journalistically
irresponsible. Furthermore, it is important to recognize that
all ideological groups seek to take part in spheres of influence —
not just Christians.

While the Christian Reconstructist movement,
itself, if concerning in its most extreme forms (i.e. the death
penalty for homosexuals and the like), the involvement of Christians
at all levels of society, especially government, isn’t a new
concept. Of course, Christians wish to have their voices heard in
government. But, Goldberg would be hard-pressed to find any
candidates embracing the extreme ideals held among strict Christian Reconstructists.

This attempt at tying these candidates to such
extremism is premature and the answers to these questions could
easily be satisfied by asking the candidates themselves rather
than issuing wild postulations. But alas, wild postulations are what
Democrats do best.

I wonder if Ms. Goldberg is in the running to be
on President Obama's speech writing staff.

We believe that the Constitution of the
United States speaks for itself. There is no need to rewrite, change
or reinterpret it to suit the fancies of special interest groups or
protected classes.